Involving patients and caregivers to develop items for a new patient-reported experience measure for older adults attending the emergency department. Findings from a nominal group technique study.

CONTEXT: Patient experience is an important component of high-quality care and is linked to improved clinical outcomes across a range of different conditions. Patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) are psychometrically validated instruments designed to identify where strengths and vulnerabilities in care exist. Currently, there is no validated instrument available to measure patient experience among people aged over 65 years attending the emergency department (ED). OBJECTIVE: This paper aims to describe the process of generating, refining and prioritising candidate items for inclusion in a new PREM measuring older adults' experiences in ED (PREM-ED 65). DESIGN: One hundred and thirty-six draft items were generated via a systematic review, interviews with patients and focus groups with ED staff exploring older adults' experiences in the ED. A 1-day multiple stakeholder workshop was then convened to refine and prioritise these items. The workshop entailed a modified nominal groups technique exercise comprised of three discrete parts-(i) item familiarisation and comprehension assessment, (ii) initial voting and (iii) final adjudication. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-nine participants attended the stakeholder workshop, conducted in a nonhealthcare setting (Buckfast Abbey). The average age of participants was 65.6 years. Self-reported prior experiences of emergency care among the participants included attending the ED as a patient (n = 16, 55.2%); accompanying person (n = 11, 37.9%) and/or as a healthcare provider (n = 7, 24.1%). RESULTS: Participants were allocated time to familiarise themselves with the draft items, suggest any improvements to the item structure or content, and suggest new items. Two additional items were proposed by participants, yielding a total of 138 items for prioritisation. Initial prioritisation deemed most items 'critically important' (priority 7-9 out of 9, n = 104, 75.4%). Of these, 70 items demonstrated suitable inter-rater agreement (mean average deviation from the median < 1.04) and were recommended for automatic inclusion. Participants then undertook final adjudication to include or exclude the remaining items, using forced choice voting. A further 29 items were included. Thirty-nine items did not meet the criteria for inclusion. CONCLUSIONS: This study has generated a list of 99 prioritised candidate items for inclusion in the draft PREM-ED 65 instrument. These items highlight areas of patient experience that are particularly important to older adults accessing emergency care. This may be of direct interest to those looking to improve the patient experience for older adults in the ED. For the final stage of development, psychometric validation amongst a real-world population of ED patients is now planned. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Initial item generation was informed using qualitative research, including interviews with patients in the ED. The opinions of patients and members of the public were integral to achieving outcomes from the prioritisation meeting. The lay chair of the Royal College of Emergency Medicine participated in the meeting and reviewed the results of this study.

Initial Development of a Patient-Reported Experience Measure for Older Adults Attending the Emergency Department: Part II-Focus Groups with Professional Caregivers.

A wide range of healthcare professionals provide care for patients in the emergency department (ED). This study forms part of a wider exploration of the determinants of patient experience for older adults in the ED, to assist the development of a new patient-reported experience measure (PREM). Inter-professional focus groups aimed to build on findings from earlier interviews with patients conducted in the ED, by exploring professional perspectives on caring for older people in this setting. A total of thirty-seven clinicians, comprising nurses, physicians and support staff, participated in seven focus groups across three EDs in the United Kingdom (UK). The findings reinforced that meeting patients' communication, care, waiting, physical, and environmental needs are all central to the delivery of an optimal experience. Meeting older patients' basic needs, such as access to hydration and toileting, is a priority often shared by all ED team members, irrespective of their professional role or seniority. However, due to issues including ED crowding, a gap exists between the desirable and actual standards of care delivered to older adults. This may contrast with the experience of other vulnerable ED user groups such as children, where the provision of separate facilities and bespoke services is commonplace. Therefore, in addition to providing original insights into professional perspectives of delivering care to older adults in the ED, this study demonstrates that the delivery of suboptimal care to older adults may be a significant source of moral distress for ED staff. Findings from this study, earlier interviews, and the literature will be triangulated to formulate a comprehensive list of candidate items for inclusion in a newly developed PREM, for patients aged 65 years and older.

Initial Development of a Patient Reported Experience Measure for Older Adults Attending the Emergency Department: Part I-Interviews with Service Users.

Older adults are a major Emergency Department (ED) user group who may be especially vulnerable to the consequences of crowding and sub-optimal care. Patient experience is a critical component of high-quality ED care and has previously been conceptualised using a framework focusing on patients' needs. This study aimed to explore the experiences of older adults attending the ED in relation to the existing needs-based framework. Semi-structured interviews were conducted during an emergency care episode with 24 participants aged over 65 years in a United Kingdom ED with an annual census ~100,000. Questions exploring patient experiences of care confirmed that meeting the communication, care, waiting, physical, and environmental needs were prominent determinants of experience for older adults. A further analytical theme emerged which did not align to the existing framework, focused on 'team attitudes and values'. This study builds on existing knowledge relating to the experience of older adults in the ED. In addition, data will also contribute to the generation of candidate items for the development of a patient reported experience measure for older adults attending the ED.

A systematic review and recommendations for prom instruments for older people with frailty in emergency care.

INTRODUCTION: The current service metrics used to evaluate quality in emergency care do not account for specific healthcare outcome goals for older people living with frailty. These have previously been classified under themes of 'Autonomy' and 'Functioning'. There is no person-reported outcome measure (PROM) for older people with frailty and emergency care needs. This study aimed to identify and co-produce recommendations for instruments potentially suitable for use in this population. METHODS: In this systematic review, we searched six databases for PROMs used between 2010 and 2021 by older people living with frailty receiving acute hospital care. Studies were reviewed against predefined eligibility criteria and appraised for quality using the COSMIN Risk of Bias checklist. Data were extracted to map instrument constructs against an existing framework of acute healthcare outcome goals. Instrument face and content validity were assessed by lay collaborators. Recommendations for instruments with potential emergency care suitability were formed through co-production. RESULTS: Of 9392 unique citations screened, we appraised the full texts of 158 studies. Nine studies were identified, evaluating nine PROMs. Quality of included studies ranged from 'doubtful' to 'very good'. Most instruments had strong evidence for measurement properties. PROMs mainly assessed 'Functioning' constructs, with limited coverage of 'Autonomy'. Five instruments were considered too burdensome for the emergency care setting or too specific for older people living with frailty. CONCLUSIONS: Four PROMs were recommended as potentially suitable for further validation with older people with frailty and emergency care needs: COOP/WONCA charts, EuroQol, McGill Quality of Life (Expanded), and Palliative care Outcome Scale.

Empowering her guardians to nurture our Ocean's future.

Coastal Indigenous and Traditional communities are starting to see changes to their lives from climate change, whether this is from species range changes or displacement from land changes. For many of these communities, the ability to adequately adapt to these changes is limited by the governance structures they are required to live within, which differ from their customary practices and culture. In November 2019, a group of Indigenous and Traditional Peoples, attended the Future Seas 2030 workshop and discussed the consequences of climate change, the biggest barriers for their communities, and barriers for using traditional knowledge in order to contribute towards a more sustainable future that in the end will benefit all of earth's people. The aim of this workshop was to highlight and give a voice to the various backgrounds and real-life situations impacting on some of the world's Indigenous and Traditional communities whose connection with the oceans and coasts have been disrupted. This paper presents these issues of oppression, colonisation, language and agency, making it difficult for these groups to contribute to the current management of oceans and coasts, and asks scientists and practitioners in this space to be allies and enable the needed shift to earth's guardians taking a leading role in nurturing her for our future.

Psychological distress and trauma in doctors providing frontline care during the COVID-19 pandemic in the United Kingdom and Ireland: a prospective longitudinal survey cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on doctors is a significant concern. Due to the emergence of multiple pandemic waves, longitudinal data on the impact of COVID-19 are vital to ensure an adequate psychological care response. The primary aim was to assess the prevalence and degree of psychological distress and trauma in frontline doctors during the acceleration, peak and deceleration of the COVID-19 first wave. Personal and professional factors associated with psychological distress are also reported. DESIGN: A prospective online three-part longitudinal survey. SETTING: Acute hospitals in the UK and Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: Frontline doctors working in emergency medicine, anaesthetics and intensive care medicine during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020. PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Psychological distress and trauma measured using the General Health Questionnaire-12 and the Impact of Events-Revised. RESULTS: The initial acceleration survey distributed across networks generated a sample of 5440 doctors. Peak and deceleration response rates from the original sample were 71.6% (n=3896) and 56.6% (n=3079), respectively. Prevalence of psychological distress was 44.7% (n=1334) during the acceleration, 36.9% (n=1098) at peak and 31.5% (n=918) at the deceleration phase. The prevalence of trauma was 23.7% (n=647) at peak and 17.7% (n=484) at deceleration. The prevalence of probable post-traumatic stress disorder was 12.6% (n=343) at peak and 10.1% (n=276) at deceleration. Worry of family infection due to clinical work was the factor most strongly associated with both distress (R2=0.06) and trauma (R2=0.10). CONCLUSION: Findings reflect a pattern of elevated distress at acceleration and peak, with some natural recovery. It is essential that policymakers seek to prevent future adverse effects through (a) provision of vital equipment to mitigate physical and psychological harm, (b) increased awareness and recognition of signs of psychological distress and (c) the development of clear pathways to effective psychological care. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN10666798.

Need for recovery and physician well-being in emergency departments: national survey findings.

BACKGROUND AND IMPORTANCE: Need for recovery (NFR) describes an individual's need to physically and psychologically recuperate following a period of work. Physicians working in emergency departments (EDs) have higher NFR scores than other occupational groups. Increased NFR may precede occupational burnout and identification provides opportunities for early interventions. OBJECTIVE: To identify the incidence of well-being characteristics for ED physicians and to determine if NFR score is associated with these characteristics, whilst adjusting for potential confounders. DESIGN: This is a secondary analysis of a survey study. Responses to 11 items were summated into the NFR score, from 0 (lowest NFR) to 100. Additional items (n = 44) explored well-being, demographic and occupational characteristics. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Physicians working within 112 EDs in the UK and Ireland were surveyed in June-July 2019. OUTCOME MEASURE AND ANALYSIS: The outcome measure was self-perceptions of well-being including; current burnout, risk of future burnout and feeling overwhelmed at work. Descriptive statistics are presented alongside findings of a multiple regression analysis. MAIN RESULTS: In 4365 participants, the self-perceived incidence of current burnout, high risk of future burnout and feeling overwhelmed at work more than once a week was 24.8, 62.7 and 45.1%, respectively. For every unfavourable response of the NFR scale there was an increase in odds of 34.0% (95% CI, 31.0-37.1) for frequency of feeling overwhelmed; 53.8% (95% CI, 47.5-60.4) for current burnout; 56.2% (95% CI, 51.1-61.6) for high risk of future burnout. CONCLUSION: This study confirms an association between increased NFR score and self-perceived well-being characteristics. Factors previously reported to reduce NFR could therefore be important initiatives to improve well-being of the ED workforce.

Psychological distress during the acceleration phase of the COVID-19 pandemic: a survey of doctors practising in emergency medicine, anaesthesia and intensive care medicine in the UK and Ireland.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify psychological distress experienced by emergency, anaesthetic and intensive care doctors during the acceleration phase of COVID-19 in the UK and Ireland. METHODS: Initial cross-sectional electronic survey distributed during acceleration phase of the first pandemic wave of COVID-19 in the UK and Ireland (UK: 18 March 2020-26 March 2020 and Ireland: 25 March 2020-2 April 2020). Surveys were distributed via established specialty research networks, within a three-part longitudinal study. Participants were doctors working in emergency, anaesthetic and intensive medicine during the first pandemic wave of COVID-19 in acute hospitals across the UK and Ireland. Primary outcome measures were the General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12). Additional questions examined personal and professional characteristics, experiences of COVID-19 to date, risk to self and others and self-reported perceptions of health and well-being. RESULTS: 5440 responses were obtained, 54.3% (n=2955) from emergency medicine and 36.9% (n=2005) from anaesthetics. All levels of doctor seniority were represented. For the primary outcome of GHQ-12 score, 44.2% (n=2405) of respondents scored >3, meeting the criteria for psychological distress. 57.3% (n=3045) had never previously provided clinical care during an infectious disease outbreak but over half of respondents felt somewhat prepared (48.6%, n=2653) or very prepared (7.6%, n=416) to provide clinical care to patients with COVID-19. However, 81.1% (n=4414) either agreed (31.1%, n=2709) or strongly agreed (31.1%, n=1705) that their personal health was at risk due to their clinical role. CONCLUSIONS: Findings indicate that during the acceleration phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, almost half of frontline doctors working in acute care reported psychological distress as measured by the GHQ-12. Findings from this study should inform strategies to optimise preparedness and explore modifiable factors associated with increased psychological distress in the short and long term. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN10666798.

Implementation of the 'TAKE STOCK' Hot Debrief Tool in the ED: a quality improvement project.

Hot debriefing (HoD) describes a structured team-based discussion which may be initiated following a significant event. Benefits may include improved teamwork, staff well-being and identification of learning opportunities. Existing literature indicates that while staff value HoD following significant events, it is infrequently undertaken in practice. Internationally, several frameworks for HoD have been developed, although none are widely adopted for use in the ED. A quality improvement project was conducted to introduce HoD into a single UK ED in North West England, between January and March 2019. Following stakeholder consultation, the 9-item 'TAKE STOCK' tool was developed. Implementation of the tool increased the number of HoD (0-2.2 HoD episodes/week). Findings from the first plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycle are presented, which revealed the key strengths and limitations of this model. Staff perceptions of the tool were evaluated using a self-administered short questionnaire designed by the authors. Satisfaction with TAKE STOCK was assessed using 10-point numerical scales. Across respondents (n-15), average satisfaction scores exceeded 9 out of 10 concerning patient care, staff self-care, decision-making, education, teamwork and identification of equipment issues. Implementation of HoD into the ED is feasible and viewed as beneficial by staff. Implementation toolkits for TAKE STOCK have been requested by 42 additional UK hospitals and ambulance trusts, demonstrating significant interest in its use. Research is now required to formally validate HoD frameworks for use in the ED, and assess whether HoD results in sustained improvements to staff and patient outcomes.

Need for recovery amongst emergency physicians in the UK and Ireland: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the need for recovery (NFR) among emergency physicians and to identify demographic and occupational characteristics associated with higher NFR scores. DESIGN: Cross-sectional electronic survey. SETTING: Emergency departments (EDs) (n=112) in the UK and Ireland. PARTICIPANTS: Emergency physicians, defined as any registered physician working principally within the ED, responding between June and July 2019. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: NFR Scale, an 11-item self-administered questionnaire that assesses how work demands affect intershift recovery. RESULTS: The median NFR Score for all 4247 eligible, consented participants with a valid NFR Score was 70.0 (95% CI: 65.5 to 74.5), with an IQR of 45.5-90.0. A linear regression model indicated statistically significant associations between gender, health conditions, type of ED, clinical grade, access to annual and study leave, and time spent working out-of-hours. Groups including male physicians, consultants, general practitioners (GPs) within the ED, those working in paediatric EDs and those with no long-term health condition or disability had a lower NFR Score. After adjusting for these characteristics, the NFR Score increased by 3.7 (95% CI: 0.3 to 7.1) and 6.43 (95% CI: 2.0 to 10.8) for those with difficulty accessing annual and study leave, respectively. Increased percentage of out-of-hours work increased NFR Score almost linearly: 26%-50% out-of-hours work=5.7 (95% CI: 3.1 to 8.4); 51%-75% out-of-hours work=10.3 (95% CI: 7.6 to 13.0); 76%-100% out-of-hours work=14.5 (95% CI: 11.0 to 17.9). CONCLUSION: Higher NFR scores were observed among emergency physicians than reported in any other profession or population to date. While out-of-hours working is unavoidable, the linear relationship observed suggests that any reduction may result in NFR improvement. Evidence-based strategies to improve well-being such as proportional out-of-hours working and improved access to annual and study leave should be carefully considered and implemented where feasible.

COVID-19 emergency response assessment study: a prospective longitudinal survey of frontline doctors in the UK and Ireland: study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic is putting an unprecedented strain on healthcare systems globally. The psychological impact on frontline doctors of dealing with the COVID-19 pandemic is currently unknown. This longitudinal professional survey aims to understand the evolving and cumulative effects of working during the COVID-19 outbreak on the psychological well-being of doctors working in emergency departments (ED), intensive care units (ICU) and anaesthetics during the pandemic. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This study is a longitudinal questionnaire-based study with three predefined time points spanning the acceleration, peak and deceleration phases of the COVID-19 pandemic.The primary outcomes are psychological distress and post-trauma stress as measured by the General Health Questionnaire-12 (GHQ-12) and Impact of Events Scale-Revised (IES-R). Data related to personal and professional characteristics will also be collected. Questionnaires will be administered prospectively to all doctors working in ED, ICU and anaesthetics in the UK and Ireland via existing research networks during the sampling period. Data from the questionnaires will be analysed to assess the prevalence and degree of psychological distress and trauma, and the nature of the relationship between personal and professional characteristics and the primary outcomes. Data will be described, analysed and disseminated at each time point; however, the primary endpoint will be psychological distress and trauma at the final time point. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the University of Bath, UK (ref: 4421), and Children's Health Ireland at Crumlin, Ethics Committee. Regulatory approval from the Health Regulation Authority (UK), Health and Care Research Wales (IRAS: 281944).This study is limited by the fact that it focuses on doctors only and is survey based without further qualitative interviews of participants. It is expected this study will provide clear evidence of the psychological impact of COVID-19 on doctors and will allow present and future planning to mitigate against any psychological impact. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN10666798.

Measuring 'Need for Recovery' as an indicator of staff well-being in the emergency department: a survey study.

BACKGROUND: The Need for Recovery (NFR) Scale is an 11-item questionnaire that assesses how work affects intershift recovery. Items are summated to form a score with a maximum value of 100. Previously reported scores range from 38 in nurses to 55 in miners. This study aimed to determine the NFR Score among ED staff and to identify whether the NFR Score was associated with characteristics potentially implicated with recovery from work. METHODS: Staff in a single ED in the South West of England (annual attendances of 93 000) were asked to complete an electronic questionnaire incorporating the NFR Scale plus additional items relating to demographic, work-related and well-being characteristics, in their own time during January 2018. Descriptive statistics are presented, including median NFR Scores and associations with additional characteristics. Thematic analysis of free-text comments from an open-ended question was undertaken. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-eight responses were obtained (80.3% capture). Median NFR Score across all staff groups was 81.8 out of 100.0 (95% CI 72.7 to 81.8). Shift duration exceeding 12 hours, dissatisfaction with work-life balance and self-reported perceptions of burnout were associated with significantly elevated NFR Scores. Themes resulting from the open-ended question were 'barriers to intershift recovery' and 'coping with work'. CONCLUSION: The NFR Scores in this study exceeded scores reported elsewhere and were associated with some demographic, occupational and well-being characteristics. The NFR Scale has utility to measure the need for intershift recovery among ED staff. A larger study is warranted to identify specific determinants of recovery and to provide recommendations.

What difference can a year make? Findings from a survey exploring student, alumni and supervisor experiences of an intercalated degree in emergency care.

BACKGROUND: One third of UK medical students undertake an intercalated degree, typically in traditional academic disciplines. It is less usual for students to undertake intercalated degrees that are directly aligned to a clinical speciality with longitudinal placements. This cross sectional survey aims to explore the self-reported experiences of students, alumni and supervisors associated with a clinically oriented intercalated degree in emergency care featuring a longitudinal placement in a hospital emergency department over a 9-month academic year. Themes for exploration include student clinical and academic development, effect on career choice, supervisor experience and the effect on host institutions. METHODS: Current students, previous alumni, and clinical placement supervisors associated with a single intercalated degree programme in urgent and emergency care since 2005 were identified from records and using social media. Separate online surveys were then developed and distributed to current students/ previous alumni and consultant physician supervisors, between May and August 2016. Results are presented using basic descriptive statistics and selected free text comments. RESULTS: Responses were obtained from 37 out of 46 contactable students, and 14 out of 24 supervisors (80 and 63%, respectively). Students self-reported increased confidence in across a range of clinical and procedural competencies. Supervisors rated student competence in clinical, inter-professional and academic writing skills to be commensurate with, or in many cases exceeding, the level expected of a final year medical student. Supervisors reported a range of benefits to their own professional and personal development from supervising students, which included improved teaching and mentoring skills, providing intellectual challenge, and helping with the completion of audits and service improvement projects. CONCLUSIONS: Students report the acquisition of a range of clinical, academic, and inter-professional skills following their intercalated BSc year. A positive experience was reported by supervisors, extending to host institutions. Students reported feeling more enthusiastic about emergency medicine careers on completion. However, as students embarking on this degree naturally bring pre-existing interest in the area, it is not possible to attribute causation to these associations. Further investigation is also required to determine the longer term effect of clinically oriented intercalated degrees on career choice.

'They do not care how much you know until they know how much you care': a qualitative meta-synthesis of patient experience in the emergency department.

BACKGROUND: Patient experience is positively associated with both clinical effectiveness and patient safety and should be a priority for emergency care providers. While both quantitative and qualitative approaches can be used to evaluate patient experience in the emergency department (ED), the latter is well aligned to develop a detailed understanding of features influencing the lived experience of ED patients. This study aimed to systematically review the literature of qualitative studies to identify determinants of adult patient experience in the ED. METHODS: A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta-Analysis compliant systematic review was conducted using PubMed, CINAHL, EMBASE, BNI and bibliography searches to identify qualitative studies exploring patient experiences in ED published in English between 1997 and 2018. Quality assessment was conducted using the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist. Descriptive text and quotations relating to patient experience were extracted from included studies and a meta-synthesis conducted using thematic analysis. RESULTS: A total of 625 records were screened from which 40 studies underwent full review and 22 were included. Results were coded by two researchers (BG and JML). Meta-synthesis identified 198 discrete units of analysis which were clustered around five analytical themes. These were based on the perceived 'needs' of patients visiting the ED and were defined as communication, emotional, competent care, physical/environmental and waiting needs. Findings were translated into a conceptual model for optimising patient experience in the ED. CONCLUSION: This meta-synthesis provides a framework for understanding the determinants of patient experience in the ED. The resulting conceptual model and recommendations may have the potential to directly inform practice and improve the patient experience.

Does dispatcher-assisted bystander CPR improve outcomes from adult out-of-hospital cardiac arrest?

This short review addresses the evidence behind dispatcher-assisted CPR (DA-CPR) and whether it contributes to overall survival of out-of-hospital cardiac arrest (OHCA). Six papers directly addressed the review question and were selected for appraisal, including one systematic review. The outcomes of these studies demonstrate variable results from the implementation of DA-CPR strategies. While DA-CPR has some utility as a substitute for spontaneously delivered bystander CPR, available evidence suggests there is scope to improve. Further work should focus on the identification and adoption of more effective protocols.

Strengths and weaknesses in team communication processes in a UK emergency department setting: findings using the Communication Assessment Tool-Team.

INTRODUCTION: Identifying weaknesses in emergency department (ED) communication may highlight areas where quality improvement may be beneficial. This study explores whether the Communication Assessment Tool-Team (CAT-T) survey can identify communication strengths and weaknesses in a UK setting. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine the frequency of patient responses for each item on the CAT-T survey and to compare the proportion of responses according to patient and operational characteristics. METHODS: Adults presenting to the minors area of a semi-urban ED between April and May 2015 were included. Those lacking capacity or in custody were excluded. Multivariate analysis identified associations between responses and demographic/operational characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 407/526 eligible patients responded (77.3%). Respondents were mostly White British (93.9%), with a median age of 45 years. Most responses were obtained during daytime hours (84.2% between 08 : 00 and 18 : 00). The median reported times to triage, assessment and disposition were 15, 35 and 90 min, respectively. Items most frequently rated as 'very good'/'excellent' (strengths) were 'ambulance staff treated me with respect' (86.7%), ED staff 'let me talk without interruptions' (85%) and 'paid attention to me' (83.7%). Items most frequently rated as 'poor'/'fair' (weaknesses) were 'encouraged me to ask questions', 'reception treated me with respect' (10.4%) and 'staff showed an interest in my health' (6.8%). Arrival time, analgesia at triage and time to assessment were associated with significantly increased odds of positive perception of team communication for a range of items. CONCLUSION: The CAT-T survey may be used within a UK setting to identify discrete strengths and weaknesses in ED team communication.

"Do you really need to ask me that now?": a self-audit of interruptions to the 'shop floor' practice of a UK consultant emergency physician.

OBJECTIVES: To map interruptions encountered by a senior physician performing a variety of everyday tasks on an emergency department (ED) 'shop floor' in the UK in order to identify tasks most likely to be interrupted, modes of interruption and those interruptions most likely to result in breaks as suspension of the original task. METHODS: A self-observational audit study of interruptions was undertaken by a consultant emergency physician in a medium-sized ED over 25 separate shifts totalling 119 h. The main outcome measures were type and occurrence of interruption in relation to mode of original task. 'Success' of interruptions and number of outstanding tasks were also recorded. RESULTS: 718 interruptions were recorded, with an average of 6 per hour. A mean number of 2.44 outstanding tasks were recorded on each occasion of interruption. Verbal advice, telephone calls and interpretations of x-rays were the most common forms of interruption. 498 interruptions (69%) were successful, defined as interruptions that resulted in a task break (over-riding and suspension of the original task). The most successful interruptions were calls to the resuscitation room (95%). Interruptions from electronic telecommunications systems were extensive (33% of total) with success dependent on the type of communication system. Telephone conversations were rarely interrupted (16% compared with a mean of 69%). CONCLUSIONS: Overt electronic communication systems may have a disproportionate impact in determining the likelihood for successful interruptions. Formal consideration of how to prioritise and manage interruptions from various channels could be usefully added to emergency medicine education and training.